Share this project

Share this project

We started as the first commercial effort to bring Android to the PC. We're still at it, now on GitHub rebuilding - combining the best of the open-source world, with cutting-edge commercial drivers, licensed from Intel. (Console.com.co)

We would rather donate $50,000 with the industry, via Console Developer Rewards (which we're in the process of rolling out), than pay highway robbery. We didn't kill Android-IA for PC, and forking Android-x86 kept our project alive. We stand by the call, we're proud of it, and we aren't going to refund you.

I'd say their "demands" were generous to you. They do all the work. You hand them 2/3 and keep the 1/3 for yourself to spend on whatever you spend on........

Let's get this straight: a shakedown is $78,497 that 5,695 backers of this Kickstarter gave based on promises and claims of work already completed. This is not a charity Kickstarter for one man and his many multiple personalities collectively referred to as "we" and "us".

@Gerald - We have posted pages of answers to questions in the past week. We expect normal operations to resume early next week when the team gets off the simultaneous and unexpected travel and leave.

We are not obligated to re-re-answer questions persistently. Contrary to the belief of some, Kickstarter does not obligate us to answer any questions here... we spend hours each week doing so, because we think it's the right thing to do. We have limited resources and tackle as many questions as we can on a regular basis.

@WANG - Our focus has been on using Intel's more advanced GPU drivers that are more difficult to integrate. We are still using Mesa because of a known issue there. Our Mesa is 11.2 at the moment and there's a bug with our K4.0 blocking DV8P and a few other BYT-T systems.

@Ng - It's a worthy question. Unfortunately, we can't give you excellent answers. There are several unknown factors.

First, Google builds Chrome OS out in the open. They do not with Android. Google freezes everyone out of what the next version of Android will have. We hit that problem with Lollipop. Intel couldn't tell us that major components we relied on, would be pulled from Lollipop, until after Google made it available.

So, we have no idea what Android N will have, beyond what Google has insinuated. Hence, we have no idea yet what it will take to get into Android N.

In general, and this is very general, we usually hit our stride with an Android version once its first maintenance release ships (MR1). For Lollipop that was Android 5.1. For Marshmallow, Google deemed 6.0.1 as the MR1 release. Why? Hard to say. 6.0.1 was less major than 5.1. But, we do have Marshmallow up and running.

The good news is that Marshmallow is far less revolutionary than Lollipop. In many ways, it's much more like Windows 7 vs Vista, than Windows 7 vs Windows 8. What we're doing with Lollipop today, is carrying over to Marshmallow.

You asked "when" - and now you know why it's hard for us to answer that totally. It would not be hard to fathom Marshmallow builds for Kickstarter backers some time in April. We have to shore up Lollipop and ship a truly public release.

Finally, we have another product in the pipeline as well - one that will hopefully actually make us some money. We haven't shared it with very many people, but it has been our most rapid prototyping of anything we've done to date. The people we've shared it with immediately have said we have to sell it. And no, we aren't planning on crowdfunding it.

Finally, on OEMs. Let's be clear. The moment Google said they were merging Chrome and Android - the OEMs pretty much were told to wait for Google. We seriously doubt OEMs are going to ship any Android-on-PC solution until Google leads there.

Our hope, is that the Chromium team carries over the developmental tenants of Chrome OS - building new versions out in the open, rather than in a closed-release state, so that we can all contribute, stabilize, and differentiate into our own niches that better the Android ecosystem.

Speaking of what the OEMS want, When can you reach Marshmallow? Before Android N (or whatever version coming out this year) ? Right now you are delivering Lollipop around half year into Marshmallow's age. Based on the track record, I wouldn't be confident on your stuff if I'm one of the OEMs.

My question is when. Just give us a rough estimation will do and I don't need to know anything else.

@Sravan - We just don't see it that way. By not breaking Android APIs, we can get to Marshmallow faster, and be on a level playing field with where the OEMs are wanting us to be. It will also give us comparative advantage.

We appreciate the feedback, but we feel that sticking with Marshmallow's multitasking APIs and multi-app support is a better path, and will make it easier to implement our original vision. It may be a rougher road initially, but we stand by the call.

The marketing game says that the one to enter the market first is the winner and in this case its the remix os from Jide. If you want people to adopt Console OS, then it should be better than remix os. But from where it stands today, Console OS would take forever to reach where remix os is today. Also i think you should cut down on being jack of all trades i.e. Marshmellow and concentrate on giving your backer Console Os Pro with the 100 features that you promised on the Lollipop.

@Sravan - There's no question that Jide has been "supporting" Android-x86 for awhile now, and we intend to pursue the appearances of impropriety there more aggressively. We'll say this: We didn't pay Android-x86's shakedown demands. We can't say the same about other projects with any level of certainty. We may have paid a social media cost for that, but we don't regret it.

As to Console OS today, there's no question starting from scratch delayed us. We're now an open-source project. We're focused on making pure Android great on the PC. We aren't deterred by that, at all.

@WANG - We know, but not all BayTrail-T graphics integrations are alike. There are considerable Video BIOS differences and other errata. This is why Console OS works great on the T100 today, but has issues on the Dell Venue 8 Pro, ones we and Intel are still working to resolve.

Remix Os from jide is everything that Console Os should have been. Easy installation , works with UEFI and Non Uefi devices. Touchscreen , wifi, audio , video , android games work without crashes or hitch. Proudly displays the android x-86 logo which it uses as a base. Best implementation of android for PC so far

Please respond to the following allegations with more then calling them lies:

1. No one else except Christopher Price works for MMV/Console Inc. Since day one of this project, he has refused to answer the simple question of the number of employees in his company. However, he claimed earlier in the Kickstarter comments section to have "engineers", which is plural meaning at least two other employees besides himself. However, he now refrains from referring to his departments at all by quantifiable nouns, instead resorting to using terms such as "engineering" to describe areas of his company. When asked on multiple occasions for the number of employees in his company, he pretended to have been asked for names, not numbers.

2. He falsely claimed to have already delivered Console OS Pro. He has said in the Kickstarter comments section that he already delivered "Console OS Pro" to backers. Currently, Console OS still lacks Pro features. The Pro version, by definition, would have Pro features.

4. He tested thousands of paid Play Store apps without prior backer consent, either using thousands of dollars of Kickstarter funds to purchase them or engaging in pirating to obtain them. He claimed online that he had tested thousands of paid Play Store apps on Console OS. This would mean he had either spent thousands of dollars to purchase them or he had obtained them illegitimately by pirating them.

Exhibit A: "We've successfully imported and tested thousands of paid play store apps, right in our own labs."
Price never responded back explaining how he acquired those apps. Viewable here:
http://i.imgur.com/cgr9nng.jpg

5. He falsely claimed to have already built a prototype with over 100 features already built-in before the project campaign. He has been unwilling and unable to produce the original prototype that he already "built" prior to the project. Likewise, he has been unwilling and unable to provide verifiable visual evidence, either through prerecorded video or live screencast, which showed said prototype had "over new 100 features already built-in."

6. He fraudulently obtained backer funds by purposely withholding information about Android-IA for Core's suspension until the refund window had past. He withheld the information that Android-IA for Core's development had been suspended, of which he was informed three days after the campaign had ended. He did not let backers know Android-IA for Core was crucial for Console OS's on-going development. He even made it appear in campaign materials that it was a direct competitor, not the basis for Console OS's code. Somehow, the rest of the industry understood Android-IA for Core's suspension to be indefinite but not Price. He did not inform backers of its suspension until backer funds could no longer be refunded, almost six months later. Per Kickstarter policy, all project creators can fully refund their backers through Amazon Payments up to 60 days after a campaign has ended.

Exhibit A: "@Dave - We're still determined to make that happen, despite pullback from partners. Had Intel called us up during our Kickstarter campaign and said 'hey, heads up, yes we can confirm we're suspending Android development for Core processors' - then we would have posted that.
We didn't get confirmation of that until three days (72 hours) after our Kickstarter campaign ended... it was a punch in the gut, frankly we're even surprised we got this far in the wake of that."
Viewable here:
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/mmv...t-11535212

@Jason - We know people who read the comment wall daily might not see it as new news, but much as Windows 10 has a fast and slow ring, we've been using our comment wall similarly.

v0.4.96 has tested well with you constantly-reloading, comment followers, we said in our update earlier today that we would roll out support and release notes for that release to everyone late today.

We also promised we would unveil details for Console Developer Rewards - which is not a talent project focused on us, but on giving back to our upstream projects - by the end of February... which is what we did late yesterday.

As we said a few updates ago, we have merged Console OS Standard and Pro into one release for now. This was necessary to keep the project alive, and permitted under the mid-2014 Kickstarter TOS.

We will provide more details on what to expect on the roadmap, in our next update, due out tonight.

But you have not cleared up any of the allegations levied against you, some of which deal directly with regard to the said Intel technology. Shall I continue to repost those here (Summary of Allegations Against Christopher Price) so that you address them point by point? I'm assuming you know exactly what I'm talking about.

@Gearld - We're here to clear up those misconceptions. We licensed technology from Intel, that unfortunately mid-way through our development... they stopped building. We then forked an open-source project to replace those components, and are working with Intel to bring the last-mile drivers needed to support Dell Venue 8 Pro properly back.

@Matt - See links above where we addressed this controversey in-depth:

@graphidz - We aren't refunding backers. We worked with Kickstarter to drop a little over a dozen backers who were draining both companies resources, and accounted for over half the nearly 4,000 comments on our wall. As a courtesy, we made a one-time exception and refunded those people, who we feel were trolling us - at the detriment of other backers.

I pledged to this project in order to get Android apps on my Dell Venue 8 Pro which was specifically targeted as one the first device to get Console OS. That was two years ago and there has been nothing, but excuses. Now there is the damning accusations of simply copying other's code. I would like a refund based on this blatant misrepresentation.

Question on the email that was just sent out. I am very excited to see an update already coming. Reading "If you don't want to wait, just log in to Console Accounts as a backer - and download away!" does this mean the new update is already available to us?

Also, don't accuse me of spamming, I've never heard of the issue before and only I'm asking you to explain what's happening between you and the android x86 project you linked to (if you hadn't linked to it, I never would have seen his statement). If you reply rudely or try to censor me you will look guilty (you tell people below kickstarter will remove their posts because you don't like them and consider them trolling, but they never did, because they don't violate ToS).

One of the links you posted in your recent update, to Android x86, accuses you of being a scam and stealing code from Android x86 on their front page (from the author of that project): http://www.android-x86.org/

Hi all,
[CC this to Android-IA list since the guy continues
lying on Android-IA list]

Honestly speaking, I really have no time to check what
Christopher Price and his crappy Console OS did recently.
But I'm getting more and more private requests to ask me
to stop him from stealing the Android-x86 effort.
So as the project leader of the Android-x86 project,
I think I need to do something.

As a background for new comers who haven't heard
the story of Console OS, here is a brief:

Christopher Price started a project called Console OS
at Kickstart in the middle 2014. He promised
"We've rebuilt Android™ to be a primary operating system
for your PC, 2-in-1 or PC Tablet. Over 100 new features
built-in already..."

Christopher also announced his Kickstart campaign
on the android-x86 list to seek for support.
He claimed Console OS will be shipped at the end of 2014.
Finally he succeeded to collect $78,497 for the project.

However, without any real demo and detailed explanation
how he could achieve his goal, the android-x86 community
quickly exposed this is just a scam and banned this guy forever.

In Dec 2014 Christopher released a first test build of Kitkat
called DR1 to his backers only. However, according to
the comments of some backers, this is just a copy of
android-ia image without any promised features.
Most devices he promised to support cannot install
or even boot the DR1.

While most of his backers are waiting for an update of Kitkat DR2,
Christopher claimed he was moving the development
of Console OS to Android 5.x (Lollipop) since most backers
voted to do so. However,
he is unable to deliver any Lollipop build one year later.
He made many excuses like the most devices have
32-bit UEFI (which is never an issue of android-x86),
Intel didn't support Core processors
(which are supported by android-x86) anymore, and
the Lollipop Logjam (I really have no idea what it is).

Two months ago after the android-x86 5.1-rc1 released,
Christopher claimed he will "open source" the code of
Console OS soon to speed up the development.
Several days ago I was informed the
"Console OS source code" finally appears in github:

==> at least he is honest that he uses android-x86 code,
but what's the improvements??

* Device-specific build targets for BayTrail-T

==> well, just renaming

* A new home screen, Trebuchet (from CyanogenMod)

==> how could you called it an improvement by just
adding a launcher from another open source project?
besides, where is the source?

* Intel drivers (though many are not active yet)

==> actually all of them are not active
"

Strictly speaking, this guy is legally to fork android-x86
and sell it because this project is open source licensed
(via Apache License, GNU GPL or BSD-like licenses
depends on the components you use).
At first I hope I can just ignored what this guy did
and continue our development,
But after reading more evidences including the
comments of his backers and others,
I think I could endure it no longer.

Christopher Price continues cheating his backers
and all others that "his team" is developing an OS which
is much better than other competitors (including android-x86):

However, one year and a half later,
the guy just copied and renamed android-x86
and then claimed this is his amazing OS!

All the developers of android-x86 including me
have spent many sleepless nights to code,
test and debug android-x86 to make it better,
but this guy just copied it to deceive his backers.
The dishonest actions do hurt the android-x86
community very much.

I have to clarify I'm not against the business.
Using android-x86 to do some business is totally fine.

If at the time his Kickstart campaign began,
he honestly described he will use and ship
a unmodified (just renamed) android-x86 product,
and the backers still support it. I'm fine with it.

If he does make some improvements based
on the android-x86 code, I'm glad to see so.

However, cheating the world that he is developing
something amazing on Kickstart in 2014
but finally just copied an open source project that
he degraded at first (see the competitive chart on his site)
is very immoral.

When Kickstart campaign began in 2014, he promised
you "A" (a much better stuff) and accept your money,
but now he just deliver you "B" (a totally different stuff).
If you are a backer, can you accept?
If this is not a scam, what is a scam?

IMO, Christopher Price and his Console OS is
*a cancer* that lives by the nutrient of android-x86.
If we can't cut it immediately, he will continue
absorbing the effort of android-x86 and finally
choke this project.

So if you still cherish the small achievements
we have done so far, please help me to
stop this guy from hurting the community.
I beg for your assistance including

* If you know some media reporters,
tell them the truth about Console OS.
Ask your friends to publish some news
about the failed story of Console OS.
Forward letter to anyone who heard the
Console OS and tell them the truth.
* If you are a backer, tell Kickstart and other backers
the facts. Question Kickstart why they allow
such a scam existing on its platform.
Consider to take legal action to stop the scam.
* I believe some developers from the community
are helping Christopher Price to make the fraud.
I ask you stop doing so since you're playing with fire.

Let us know if you have any other idea to stop this guy.

Please keep the discussion rational in this thread.
Avoid words that may result in flaming war.
Also avoid simply reply like "I agree" or "I support you".
Please express your support by doing the above items
or any useful thing you think.

Finally, if you still believe Christopher Price and his vaporware,
just go away since you are not welcome.

We regret that we're English-only, but we only committed to that from the outset. Physical perks should be discussed in the next update for those waiting for Backer Plus update. We are working to get those couple hundred or so items shipped.

Update #34 should roll out some time tomorrow. It will include release notes and more details about Lollipop that will make it easier for backer to get acquainted. This will be alongside Wiki updates over the next week ahead of general availability.

@Sravan - We promised to post all the details for Console Developer Rewards by month's end, and we're going to get that rolling before midnight.

We held an all-hands series of meetings over the past 24 hours, on something unrelated (but very cool). Once we get some rest, the Lollipop documentation is next up.

When we say advanced, we mean it. Our goal over the Lollipop cycle is to replace the Advanced install path completely... it's just not meant for the average person, so documentation on that route may be sparse, at least at first.

On the plus side, it will augment the Android-x86 community with more/better documentation, much as our Build Instructions and guides do on the Wiki already (those are going to get a few updates based on similar feedback we've gotten over the past week from Viewers Like You™ too).

Things that dont work
1) The bundled gallery app
2) Any app which is downloaded from Amazon app store

I go to m.youtube.com on the browser and i get Audio and no Video

Any application that is installed crashes immediately

First came the DR1 , then now the lollipop and now you say you are working on Marshmallow.
I would like you to please take a break and reconsider this move.

First get a stable and bug free version of lollipop out and then worry about the next release. Dont go by marketing and other blah blah blah stuff. Your backers are who trust in you, you lose their trust and nothing will matter anymore.

Well, we fixed the server issues, and updated the account software with a patch from our vendor...

... unfortunately, it didn't fix the password reset bug.

So, what we've done is deployed an SSL certificate. This is only supposed to take a few hours to verify and activate, and it will make sure the password reset system work properly. Plus, our account system will then be secure end-to-end.

For the next few hours, you may get a certificate error. This is because the Let's Encrypt system has to co-sign the certificate. So, we won't send any updates out until tomorrow to be extra-extra sure.

We're using the Let's Encrypt certificate for the first time, and we are excited to begin deploying it to all Console sites, and making https the default going forward!

P.S. If you are using an old web browser, time to update. IE7 and earlier will have issues with Let's Encrypt. Chrome still works with Windows XP (for now), and Console OS fully supports Let's Encrypt domain names.

We have a patch that should (emphasis, should) fix the password reset bug. Unfortunately, our host provider moved us to a new server (we suspect, to keep up with the demand - now that we're shipping Lollipop).

Well, as our Murphy's Law would have it, that move broke the SSH salts. We've opened a support ticket - we've hit a wall at this hour otherwise. It's particularly frustrating because we're really confident we can fix this bug, but our server won't let us in to fix it.